HomeMy WebLinkAboutARCH REV - RES NO 1012RESOLUTION NO. 1012
A RESOLUTION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MAJOR ARCHITECTURAL
APPLICATION, CASE 3.2802 MAJ, TO CONSTRUCT A
61,658-SQUARE-FOOT SELF-STORAGE FACILITY WITH A
912-SQUARE-FOOT LEASING OFFICE ON A 3.55-ACRE
UNDEVELOPED PARCEL LOCATED AT 890 NORTH GENE
AUTRY TRAIL (APN: 677-260-055), ZONE M-1-P, SECTION 7.
THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FINDS AND DETERMINES AS FOLLOWS:
A.NWB Palm Sp rings, LLC, (the "Applicant") has filed Case 3.2802 MAJ, a Major
Architectural Application, in accordance with Section 94.04.04 (Development Permit) of the
Plan Springs Zoning to construct a self-storage facility with a leasing office on a 3.55-acre
undevelope d parcel for the West Coast Self-Storage facility at 890 North Gene Autry Trail,
Zone M-1-P; and
B.On April 8, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2042, amending Section
94.04.00 of the PSZC to reassign review of Major Architectural Review (MAJ) applications
from the City's Planning Commission to the City's Architectural Review Committee; and
C.On March 9, 2022, a public meeting to consider Case 3.2802 MAJ, Major Development
Permit Application, was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law;
the Planning Commission voted 6-1 (Absent: Weremiuk) to approve the application, Case
3.2802 MAJ, subject to conditions of approval; a11d
D.On April 4, 2022, a public meeting to consider Case 3.2802 MAJ, Major Architectural
Application, was held by the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) in accordance with
applicable law; the ARC voted 7-0 for further study due to design concerns; and
D.On June 30, 2022, notice of a public meeting of the Architectural Review Committee of
the City of Palm Springs to consider the above-mentioned application was given in accordance
with applicable law; and
E.On July 5, 2022, the City's Architectural Review Committee held a public meeting in
accordance with applicable public law. At sa id meeting, the Architectural Review Committee
carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in conne ction with the Project,
including, but not limited to, the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented.
THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLVES:
Section 1: The proposed project is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and it is categorically exempt from the